Camilty Wind Farm - Partnerships for Renewables
Camilty Wind Farm - Partnerships for Renewables Camilty Wind Farm - Partnerships for Renewables
Camilty Wind Farm 11.9.22 It is concluded that the proposed Camilty development will not add cumulatively to the effects on this habitat within the surrounding area. Potential Cumulative Effects on Protected Species 11.9.23 The 5 km buffer distance takes into account the ranging distances of protected species detected on the Camilty site and the context and resource of the habitats recorded within the surrounding area. In north-east Scotland, core foraging areas of common pipistrelle have been recorded to extend much further from the roost than for soprano pipistrelle (mean of 1.44 km and 0.69 km respectively) (Harris and Yalden 2008). Otters tend to occupy large home ranges with males ranging along approximately 32 km of watercourse length and females ranging along 20 km of watercourse length (SNH, 2008). This varies greatly depending on the density of waterways within an area and the availability of prey within the area. While the habitats within the site boundary were generally assessed as being of low potential for otter, the surrounding area contains a number of good quality waterways and waterbodies with good foraging potential. Badger territories have been recorded to range from c.30 ha (0.3 km 2 ) in optimal habitat to >150 ha (1.5 km 2 ) in marginal habitats (Harris and Yalden 2008). Otter 11.9.24 The EIA for Harburnhead Wind Farm assessed that the proposal is not considered to have a significant effect on otter. 11.9.25 No signs of otter were found at Pearie Law wind farm and its construction is not considered to have a significant effect on otters. 11.9.26 The EIA for Fauch Hill wind farm found evidence of otter along the courses of the Crosswood Burn, Shear Burn, at a discharge into the Crosswood Reservoir and to the north of the site along the upper sections of the Water of Leith west of Colzium. It was concluded that Fauch Hill would not have a significant effect on the status or conservation value of otter associated with the site during construction. 11.9.27 While the surrounding wind farms were considered to have a minor or negligible effect on otter, if Camilty was to undergo construction as the same time as Fauch Hill wind farm, cumulatively, this may result in an increased disturbance and displacement of otter during construction. This potential effect is considered to be of small magnitude and slight level of effect (not significant in terms of the EIA Regulations). Bat Species 11.9.28 Pearie Law wind farm was considered to have low bat activity across the site, dominated by common and widespread species but there were a low number of records for the rarer Nyctalus species. It was concluded that the construction after mitigation will not have a significant effect on bats within the site. 11.9.29 Fauch Hill wind farm recorded five species of bats within the site including the rarer Nathusius pipistrelle. No roosts were found. Mitigation measures included micro-siting turbines and creating woodland edges. It was considered that the project would not have a significant effect on the nature conservation value of bats. 11.9.30 Harburnhead surveys indicated that the area was used very infrequently by brown longeared and Myotis bats. The predominant species were common pipistrelle and soprano pipistrelle. No bat roosts would be impacted and the impacts would be minimised by March 2013 11-43 ES Chapter 11 Terrestrial Ecology Copyright Partnerships for Renewables Development Co. Ltd 2013 ©
Camilty Wind Farm mitigation. Therefore it was considered that the project would not have significant effect on the nature conservation value of bats. 11.9.31 It is concluded that there would be a cumulative effect on this species within the surrounding area with respect to collision risk. This cumulative risk is considered to be of small magnitude and slight level of effect within the context of the local bat population. Badger 11.9.32 During the surveys at Pearie Law no badger setts were found but there was evidence of badgers using the area. After mitigation the impacts are considered to not be significant. 11.9.33 No evidence of badger was recorded within the survey area of Harburnhead wind farm, however a sett was noted adjacent to the survey area boundary and badgers are known to be present in the local area. 11.9.34 Fauch Hill does not consider badgers as a receptor as part of the assessment. 11.9.35 Due to the lack of suitable foraging habitat and evidence of badger activity within the site boundary it is concluded that the development will not add cumulatively to the effects on this species. 11.10 Summary 11.10.1 Table 11.22 summarises the potential effects of the proposed wind farm, recommended mitigation and enhancement actions and residual significance of the effects. March 2013 11-44 ES Chapter 11 Terrestrial Ecology Copyright Partnerships for Renewables Development Co. Ltd 2013 ©
- Page 292 and 293: Camilty Wind Farm Table 10.5 Summar
- Page 294 and 295: Camilty Wind Farm included in Appen
- Page 296 and 297: Camilty Wind Farm Table 10.6 Summar
- Page 298 and 299: Camilty Wind Farm Receptor Effect D
- Page 300 and 301: Camilty Wind Farm 11 Terrestrial Ec
- Page 302 and 303: Camilty Wind Farm 11.2 Methodology
- Page 304 and 305: Camilty Wind Farm Consultee Date of
- Page 306 and 307: Camilty Wind Farm Bat Species 11.2.
- Page 308 and 309: Camilty Wind Farm Index (HSI) devel
- Page 310 and 311: Camilty Wind Farm Conservation Sens
- Page 312 and 313: Camilty Wind Farm Table 11.6 Design
- Page 314 and 315: Camilty Wind Farm 11.3.8 There were
- Page 316 and 317: Camilty Wind Farm 11.3.16 Marshy gr
- Page 318 and 319: Camilty Wind Farm NVC Code NVC Type
- Page 320 and 321: Camilty Wind Farm was also detected
- Page 322 and 323: Camilty Wind Farm remaining 38% wer
- Page 324 and 325: Camilty Wind Farm Badger Legal Prot
- Page 326 and 327: Camilty Wind Farm current landuse i
- Page 328 and 329: Camilty Wind Farm Valued Ecological
- Page 330 and 331: Camilty Wind Farm 11.6.8 Bat activi
- Page 332 and 333: Camilty Wind Farm Table 11.16 Areas
- Page 334 and 335: Camilty Wind Farm Table 11.18 Poten
- Page 336 and 337: Camilty Wind Farm Table 11.20 Poten
- Page 338 and 339: Camilty Wind Farm Siltbusters or eq
- Page 340 and 341: Camilty Wind Farm 11.9 Cumulative E
- Page 344 and 345: Camilty Wind Farm Table 11.22 Summa
- Page 346 and 347: Camilty Wind Farm Receptor Effect D
- Page 348 and 349: Camilty Wind Farm Receptor Effect D
- Page 350 and 351: Camilty Wind Farm Receptor Effect D
- Page 352 and 353: Camilty Wind Farm • NBN Gateway W
- Page 354 and 355: Camilty Wind Farm 12.2 Methodology
- Page 356 and 357: Camilty Wind Farm activity, particu
- Page 358 and 359: Camilty Wind Farm 12.2.10 In additi
- Page 360 and 361: Camilty Wind Farm Flight Activity S
- Page 362 and 363: Camilty Wind Farm (ii) For a sample
- Page 364 and 365: Camilty Wind Farm 12.2.40 The Town
- Page 366 and 367: Camilty Wind Farm Level of Effect S
- Page 368 and 369: Camilty Wind Farm Table 12.8 Desk-b
- Page 370 and 371: Camilty Wind Farm Table 12.10 Fligh
- Page 372 and 373: Camilty Wind Farm 12.3.19 All speci
- Page 374 and 375: Camilty Wind Farm Table 12.13 Speci
- Page 376 and 377: Camilty Wind Farm Collision Risk Mo
- Page 378 and 379: Camilty Wind Farm • Goshawk; •
- Page 380 and 381: Camilty Wind Farm Species Recorded
- Page 382 and 383: Camilty Wind Farm Species Recorded
- Page 384 and 385: Camilty Wind Farm Species Recorded
- Page 386 and 387: Camilty Wind Farm Species Recorded
- Page 388 and 389: Camilty Wind Farm sites for the sam
- Page 390 and 391: Camilty Wind Farm 12.3.52 In summar
<strong>Camilty</strong> <strong>Wind</strong> <strong>Farm</strong><br />
11.9.22 It is concluded that the proposed <strong>Camilty</strong> development will not add cumulatively to the effects<br />
on this habitat within the surrounding area.<br />
Potential Cumulative Effects on Protected Species<br />
11.9.23 The 5 km buffer distance takes into account the ranging distances of protected species<br />
detected on the <strong>Camilty</strong> site and the context and resource of the habitats recorded within the<br />
surrounding area. In north-east Scotland, core <strong>for</strong>aging areas of common pipistrelle have<br />
been recorded to extend much further from the roost than <strong>for</strong> soprano pipistrelle (mean of<br />
1.44 km and 0.69 km respectively) (Harris and Yalden 2008). Otters tend to occupy large<br />
home ranges with males ranging along approximately 32 km of watercourse length and<br />
females ranging along 20 km of watercourse length (SNH, 2008). This varies greatly<br />
depending on the density of waterways within an area and the availability of prey within the<br />
area. While the habitats within the site boundary were generally assessed as being of low<br />
potential <strong>for</strong> otter, the surrounding area contains a number of good quality waterways and<br />
waterbodies with good <strong>for</strong>aging potential. Badger territories have been recorded to range<br />
from c.30 ha (0.3 km 2 ) in optimal habitat to >150 ha (1.5 km 2 ) in marginal habitats (Harris<br />
and Yalden 2008).<br />
Otter<br />
11.9.24 The EIA <strong>for</strong> Harburnhead <strong>Wind</strong> <strong>Farm</strong> assessed that the proposal is not considered to have a<br />
significant effect on otter.<br />
11.9.25 No signs of otter were found at Pearie Law wind farm and its construction is not considered<br />
to have a significant effect on otters.<br />
11.9.26 The EIA <strong>for</strong> Fauch Hill wind farm found evidence of otter along the courses of the Crosswood<br />
Burn, Shear Burn, at a discharge into the Crosswood Reservoir and to the north of the site<br />
along the upper sections of the Water of Leith west of Colzium. It was concluded that Fauch<br />
Hill would not have a significant effect on the status or conservation value of otter associated<br />
with the site during construction.<br />
11.9.27 While the surrounding wind farms were considered to have a minor or negligible effect on<br />
otter, if <strong>Camilty</strong> was to undergo construction as the same time as Fauch Hill wind farm,<br />
cumulatively, this may result in an increased disturbance and displacement of otter during<br />
construction. This potential effect is considered to be of small magnitude and slight level of<br />
effect (not significant in terms of the EIA Regulations).<br />
Bat Species<br />
11.9.28 Pearie Law wind farm was considered to have low bat activity across the site, dominated by<br />
common and widespread species but there were a low number of records <strong>for</strong> the rarer<br />
Nyctalus species. It was concluded that the construction after mitigation will not have a<br />
significant effect on bats within the site.<br />
11.9.29 Fauch Hill wind farm recorded five species of bats within the site including the rarer<br />
Nathusius pipistrelle. No roosts were found. Mitigation measures included micro-siting<br />
turbines and creating woodland edges. It was considered that the project would not have a<br />
significant effect on the nature conservation value of bats.<br />
11.9.30 Harburnhead surveys indicated that the area was used very infrequently by brown longeared<br />
and Myotis bats. The predominant species were common pipistrelle and soprano<br />
pipistrelle. No bat roosts would be impacted and the impacts would be minimised by<br />
March 2013 11-43 ES Chapter 11<br />
Terrestrial Ecology<br />
Copyright <strong>Partnerships</strong> <strong>for</strong> <strong>Renewables</strong> Development Co. Ltd 2013 ©